One of the bigger issues with Amtrak is the lacklustre infrastructure, that is mostly owned by freight companies (with prominent exceptions like the NE corridor). I wont say that Amtrak is great, but infrastructure is the bigger problem. No freight company is interested in upgrading, electrifying, speed increases or even building new lines. There are few private actors interested in the passenger rail sector (with exceptions such as Texas Central and I wish them the best).
I also can't imagine great results with new private actors, since non-high speed rail suffers even more from the competition with the car due to a lack of attractive or in many cases usable public transit option near the start or destination. And high speed rail is really expensive to build, so I have my doubts that private actors will be able to secure funding without any previous examples.
To fix passenger rail in America, in my opinion, you have to at least have a major rework of how rail infrastructure works.
Canada is also doing a lot better with rail than America, with a major priority being the independence from freight companies in regards to infrastructure.
Furthermore this is causing friction when the contract ends, and another bidder wins.
Compared with how it has been before this, when it was all state run, much hilarity ensues on all levels of operation.
Beginning with the engineers, now dispersed over different sub-contractors, not being able to assist when there is a shortage in another sub-contractor.
Leading to delays, because available ones have to be brought in by taxi from over 100+ of km away.
'Streckenkunde' == knowledge of tracks, stations and switching/marshalling/maintenance yards is degraded, because the sub-contractors don't do it all, everywhere, anymore.
Regarding maintenance, more empty movements to farther away, because not every shop can or will service everyones locos, trainsets.
For some 'unexplainable' reason, during the slightest bad weather chaos ensues, every year, again and again. No matter if cold, heat, wind, wet.
While aeons ago, they advertised with an engine plowing through the snow, caption: "Everybody is talking about the weather. We don't."
[·] https://www.spiegel.de/geschichte/68er-plakate-a-946587.html...
[·] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eo8l2qp2N8M
[·] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mGhJW5TvIuQ
This was the truth, at the time.
What we have now are a few high-speed tracks connecting the larger centers, and regional mass transportation in and around these. Outside of that it's patchwork, or doesn't exist at all. (Though it did! Once.)
In addition to that, it costs much more, and is inflexible to book.
It's FUCKED!
edit: Also 'type-ratings' for the engineers. Before pseudo-privatization and splitting in sub-groups, there was only distinction between Diesel(hydraulic) and electric locomotives, and passenger vs. freight rail. Those were about a dozen each, and they usually could drive all of them from their branch of diesel or electric. Today? Not anymore.
That's oversimplifying things a little too much – type-ratings were a little more fine-grained than that even during the days of the Federal Railways.
Privatization does essentially nothing to fix the issue of rail ownership or use. Making the service privately owned gives it no leverage to operate efficiently: that comes from regulation, which is a separate problem. The biggest difference with a privatized service is that a private service can be bullied out of existence.
So both sides cherry picking their favorite gov agencies does disservice to improving things and doubling down on what works, and criticizing what doesn't.
That, and the requirements for high speed rail are pretty much opposite of the host freight railroads, which are content to have slow, low-standard track because it’s cheaper.
The NEC is decently run. The rail conditions are so bad that if we were to privatize rail pretty much everything outside the NEC would dry up.
Is it true high speed rail, no, but at this point the startup costs of actual high speed rail are so high that private entities pretty much never take it on. (Brightline in Florida is not actually high speed rail due to the speed, Texas Central is floundering due to lawsuits, Las Vegas to LA is on constant life support, etc.)
The only profitable private railroads are the ones that started off with cheap property to develop near stations and never sold it off, essentially becoming landlords/property developers in their own right. But the horse has left the barn for that in the US and nearly all city center property is expensive for a singular entity to just buy up and redevelop.
So just saying "state owned is bad" may no be the full answer, just a part of it. There are many factors that play a role and may lead to a different answer for a different country.
The vast majority of passenger trains and all railway stations are owned and operated by NS: again a private company with the Government as sole shareholder.
Various other private companies are running local services, and all freight traffic is done by private companies too.
